Fitness Minutes: (15,230)
4,567 1/7/11 10:46 P
Hi Allison I did WWs for many years and lost a considerable amount of weight on the program. At the time, my dream was to some day become a WW leader, but that is a story for another day. Lol.
The points system on WWs is a combination of calories, fats and fiber found in food. One point "roughly" equals 50 calories. Using this type of math, with 30 points, you would be getting 1500 calories. This is a rough estimate like I said. Also, using this math, your breakfast would only be 4.5 points and not 7.5
I'm not 100% familiar with the "new" points system but from what I've read the only thing they've really changed from when I was doing it is the points value of fruit. A small apple used to be 1 point, now it's a zero point item. A banana was 2 points, now it is 0 points. I think the thinking is that none of us got fat eating too much fruit.
Your daily points target is also based on a system that takes your weight, age, sex, job and whether or not you are nursing into account before it determines your daily target. I've only had access to this specific information when I was a paying member of WWs. I'm sure it is available for free through various websites, but in my opinion you tend to get what you pay for when you get things for free. Not being critical in any way, shape or form, but when you rely on 3rd party information, you might get sent in the wrong direction.
Co-Leader: Mended Hearts
1/7/11 10:15 P
I am going to agree with Unident here ;)
You haven't had many fruits or veggies, eat an apple, orange, carrots and blueberries. That would add about 200 calories and no points. Plus, the carbs you said WW was low on. I looked up for small apple and small orange too, eat a big one and get more calories.
Wanna read about my progress? Check out my blog!!!
Don't forget though that a lot of foods (veg and maybe some fruit...?) are zero points on WW. This means you can 'fill up' on those to prevent that hunger problem, and they would help you get into your ranges as they still have calories and nutrients in them.
So in that respect, the two might merge more closely than you personally are seeing (the only vegie you even have is a serving of green beans).
Deb, in New Zealand
Fitness Minutes: (10,502)
509 1/7/11 7:41 P
I understand that the points system is a way to cause people to realize which food groups are "good" vs. "not-so-good" and is a way of training people how to eat. I honestly feel like I would starve on it.
Today I ate: Breakfast: latte and egg mcmuffin - 242 calories Lunch: tomato soup and grilled cheese - 340 calories Dinner: grilled chicken, green beans, potato wedges - 247 calories Snack: 1/2 cup of cottage cheese - 90 calories Dessert: two double chocolate milano cookies - 140 calories
According to the Weight Watchers Point calculator I needed to eat 30 points worth of food today. All of the above that I listed ended up being 29.98... almost exactly 30! However.... I have only consumed 1,059 calories so far, very much in the range of starvation. According to Sparkpeople, the only nutritional goal of the day that I have met is protein by eating 89 grams of protein so far.
I still have at least 262 more calories to go.
I understand that weight watchers works for people, hence why I wanted to see what it was like, but I feel like for me, I would be starving on this plan. On Spark, it is common knowledge that eating too little can hurt your weight loss progress.
I'm actually kind of disappointed, because weight watchers has always seemed so interesting but at least now I know it's not really for me (and I didn't have to spend any money to figure that out.)
If anyone else is curious to do the trial that I did today, here are the two websites I found helpful:
I used to use the old points system with Weight Watchers, which was only recently changed to the system that you used and is still very similar. No, you don't starve and/but, at least with the old system, if you had something with a lot of fiber it would help lower the point value so it's all based on the proportions of calories to fat to fiber, etc. and therefore rewards you for eating healthy and bulky foods.
Now that I'm starting on the Spark program again, I am having trouble getting enough fiber, now that I'm tracking it and am sure that it helps me to feel full if/when I do get enough.
This is really interesting. I bought the points calculator and I am seeing about the same thing that you are...keep me posted..thanks joy
Fitness Minutes: (10,502)
509 1/7/11 3:07 P
My lunch was worth 10 points! It was 340 calories, 58 g carbs, 5 g fat, 25 g protein, 11 g fiber. I had tomato soup with a grilled cheese.
So 10 points would be 1/3 of my daily totals. I've used up 17.5 of my 30 points, so I have only 12.5 left over for dinner/snack/dessert.
So these two meals have used up 58% of my daily points, but only 44% of my calories on the low end, and 35% of my calories on the high end.
The majority of my points seem to be made up of carbohydrates. So it seems like the most effective way to do the weight watchers program is to eat low-carb. This doesn't seem very healthy to me. Looking at my food log on spark it just seems so much healthier in my opinion.
I think part of the trick with Weight Watchers is to find things that are worth less points to eat.
I work at a Subway next door to a Weight Watchers, so we get a lot of WW members. One of them usually gets a veggie sub, but one day decided to get a salad. She stood there calculating the points, and eventually found out that the salad, with the low-fat Italian dressing, is 0 points. Free lunch, she said.
Do the whole day. You might find that the results vary a little more and that certain other food types aren't worth as many points, relatively, as the ones you chose for breakfast, for whatever reason.
Interesting thing to do though - please do the whole day and share the results! :)
Deb, in New Zealand
Fitness Minutes: (10,502)
509 1/7/11 2:22 P
I just googled the formulas for weight watchers just now to see how the SparkPeople diet constraints compared with weight watchers. Weight watchers has been very popular over the years and seems to be the most popular and effective diet. I was curious.
I found that my daily points allotted would be 30 for me. I also found the formula for the new points plus.
I just compared my breakfast which was 242 calories, 39 g carb, 4 g fat, 22 g protein, and 8 g fiber to the points system. That same breakfast would have cost me 7.5 points, which is exactly 25% of my daily total points. Whereas on Sparkpeople, that breakfast cost me 18% of daily calories on the low end and and about 15% on the high end.
So basically, my breakfast meal of a sugar-free latte and an homemade egg mcmuffin could only be eaten four times in the day before I would use up all my points. The 242 calories multiplied by four is 968 calories. So my 30 points basically equals out to under 1000 calories?? Is the Weight Watchers plan starvation? My breakfast was pretty healthy if you ask me, but it was still excessive by weight watcher standards.
SparkPeople, SparkCoach, SparkPages, SparkPoints, SparkDiet, SparkAmerica, SparkRecipes, DailySpark, and other marks are trademarks of SparkPeople, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
SPARKPEOPLE is a registered trademark of SparkPeople, Inc. in the United States, European Union, Canada, and Australia. All rights reserved.